Alwaght- While the dust of war in the region has not settled down yet, massive circulation of news about being close to an Iran-US deal has caught the world by surprise. The source was again the US President Donald Trump who had earlier talked about being close to striking a peace deal with Iran, but each time it proved otherwise.
This time, too, Trump used the same old tactic: First making a big threat and then walking back from it. In his TruthSocial site, Trump claimed progress in talks with Iran, adding that since all of the regional parties have agreed to the framework of the deal, he canceled the so-called planned attacks on Iran. He also said that the text of the deal is finalized and its signing will be arranged for the coming days in Europe.
These remarks come amid significant diplomatic movement in the region over the past few days, with the Qatari delegation’s visit to Tehran and its meeting with senior Iranian officials standing as one of the most important signs that mediation channels are now active.
At the same time as Trump’s comments, several major media outlets fueled the speculation frenzy by publishing reports, citing informed sources, about the contents of an alleged agreement.
Axios reported that after talks between Iranian officials and the Qatari mediator, an initial agreement has been reached, and the relevant parties are now reviewing the final details and setting a date for its signing. According to Axios’ sources, Iranian officials have told several countries that Tehran’s negotiations have resulted in a framework deal, but that Supreme Leader Seyyed Mojtaba Khamenei must give the final approval.
Al Jazeera’s correspondent in Tehran, Noureddine al-Dhugair, also claimed that everything is now final and settled regarding the Iran-US agreement. Al Arabiya, citing its own sources, alleged that Foreign Minister Seyyed Abbas Araghchi is set to travel to Pakistan on Saturday.
Meanwhile, news of a phone call between Qatar’s Emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, and Trump also grabbed observers’ attention. According to an official statement from the Qatari emir's office, the two sides discussed the outcomes of recent consultations and the understandings reached between Tehran and Washington.
Media claims about 14 points of the deal
Although officials in Tehran and Washington have not disclosed any details about the potential agreement, unofficial reports suggest it consists of 14 clauses that address most of the demands Iran has put forward over the past several months.
An immediate halt to hostilities on all fronts, including in Lebanon; a US commitment to non-interference in Iran’s internal affairs; a gradual lifting of the naval blockade; withdrawal of US forces from near Iran’s borders; reopening the Strait of Hormuz under arrangements acceptable to Tehran; suspension of oil and petrochemical sanctions; release of part of Iran’s frozen assets; and the start of comprehensive nuclear talks are among the deal's terms.
The reports also say the US and its allies are set to present plans for contributing to the reconstruction of Iran’s economy, worth up to $300 billion. In addition, both sides will commit to a 60-day timeline for final negotiations on fully lifting sanctions, the fate of enriched uranium, and the future of Iran’s nuclear program. Iran would reaffirm its commitment under the NPT not to produce nuclear weapons. A monitoring mechanism would be established to implement the agreement, and the final deal would be endorsed by a UN Security Council resolution.
Crucially, the final round of talks will not begin until half of Iran’s frozen assets are released, oil sanctions are suspended, and the naval blockade is lifted. And both the issue of Iran’s missile program and its support for resistance groups have been definitively taken off the table.
Tehran cautious about White House's claims
What is interesting about the recent reports is Iran's caution on them. Just contrary to the Americans, Iranians have so far refused to officially confirm these reports.
In one of rare official comments, foreign ministry spokesman Ismail Baghaee reacted to Trump's comments, saying that although a major part of the text of the deal was finalized some while ago, the repeated shifts in the positions of the American side have prevented a conclusion. Iran, he went on, has not made any flexibility in its red lines and what is said about the agreement are just speculations and nothing is finalized yet. The situation in the Strait of Hormuz is more unstable due to the American actions and so far Iran has not reached a conclusion about the deal.
Baghaee added that the country’s decision-making process is completely clear. The relevant authorities must reach a conclusion on every single clause of the text and any potential understanding. "As soon as we achieve a final conclusion, we will certainly announce it officially."
This stance shows that, contrary to the media frenzy suggesting a deal is imminent, a significant gap still remains between the two sides on several key issues, which could become the biggest obstacles to reaching an agreement in the final stages of negotiations.
Washington still unreliable
Trump, who is known for his repeated shifts and even U-turns to confuse his opponents by mixing the reality and lies for advancing his main and surprise agenda, this time, too, hours after voicing his optimism about a finalized deal used a strong tone against Iran, saying: The terms that Iran leaked out to the Fake News have NOTHING to do with the terms that were agreed to, in writing....What they said, including their weak and pathetic statement on having a deal, bears no relation to the truth... With them, there is no such thing as dealing in good faith."
Trump's fury has a clear reason. Some of the most important terms raised by the media clearly contrast the red lines earlier the White House had set about any deal with Iran.
One of the most important gaps is the Iranian enriched uranium stockpile. Trump has repeatedly said that Iran's 30-percent enriched uranium should be taken out of Iran to the US. Tehran was clear in its opposition to this proposal, saying that it will not even transfer it to a third country.
Another point of contention is the status of the Strait of Hormuz. Following recent regional developments, Iran has declared that the security conditions of this waterway will never return to their pre-war state, and that ship traffic must be redefined under new rules and arrangements. Washington, however, insists on maintaining complete freedom of navigation as it existed before, rejecting any restrictions or tolls on vessels as unacceptable.
The release of Iran’s frozen assets is another major sticking point. Trump has repeatedly opposed returning these funds, and some media outlets have even reported that the White House is considering redirecting the assets to Arab countries harmed by the recent war.
Beyond these technical and political disputes, the issue of trust remains one of the biggest potential obstacles to any deal.
This distrust becomes even more pronounced when Iranian officials, pointing to Washington’s unreliability, repeatedly cite the White House’s two previous betrayals at the negotiating table. They argue that even during ceasefires, the U.S. has continued its military aggression against Iran and the Axis of Resistance. That’s why Iranian officials continue to describe their armed forces as being on a war footing and at full military readiness.
The bottom line from recent developments is that international observers and media believe the prospects for an Iran-US deal are stronger now than at any time since the 12-day war of last year. Yet persistent disagreements over strategic issues still prevent any final judgment on where the negotiations are headed.
So, in the current conditions, given the stark differences and also a war of narratives dominating the ceasefire atmosphere, any assessment of possibility and nature of a deal is only prejudice. However, the outcome of such an agreement will become one of the most important geopolitical and security turning points of the region for the years to come and will considerably influence the dynamics of power and regional stability.
